145+ Scientific Studies Showing the Dangers of Marijuana

Who cares? You are not an authority nor have published on the issue. Your opinion is meaningless.

So then marijuana should be banned as it will save thousands from brain damage.

 

Strawman, why are you misrepresenting that I did not read the entire article?

Strawman, I never claimed to have such an education but this does not prevent me from understanding the science. As I said I do not agree with any of your arguments let alone your silly prerequisites. The studies have been published in peer-reviewed journals, unlike your whining so I suggest you go contact the authors.

Your comments are irrelevant as they are either answered in the study or can be by the authors. I am not here to entertain whining comments from people who are not qualified to make them. Feel free to talk to the authors of the study or let me know when you get your comments published then we can properly entertain them.

Stop cherry picking and making strawman arguments and I will stop using the appropriate words for the logical fallacies you consistently employ.

 

You cherry picked only studies which supported the position you wanted to make.

It isn't science to just to list studies that you agree with- it is just cherry picking.

 

There is no definitive evidence that any such thing will happen. There are studies which you have cherry picked which suggest brain damage.

Here is a link to studies as 'fair and balanced' as your OP

http://norml.org/component/zoo/category/recent-research-on-medical-marijuana

 

It is a list of studies showing the dangers of marijuana. It is only cherry picking if I intentionally did not list one that shows such dangers, which one did I forget?

 

The FDA has no regulatory powers over marijuana. Your point is irrelevant.

 

Straw man, why are you misrepresenting that I was talking about the Nature article?

I'll be sure to let her know about your impact and her impact on medical marijuana being decisively passed by the Florida voters.

Why exactly are you here?

Straw man, you are misrepresenting my positions as cherry picking and straw man.

 

The abomination of hypocrisy is worse than even a crack addiction; should we ban that too?

 

LOL- you accuse others of cherry picking- and you specifically cherry pick studies to only show the ones that seem to indicate dangers of marijuana- you purposely exclude those studies which don't agree with your agenda.

So much for your claims about science......

 

How many of those studies suggests that the drug kills like smoking does?

 

Processed meat is bad for you. Ban it? Dairy's bad for you. Ban it? Smoking cigarettes are bad for you. Ban them?

 

I thought marijuana was some miracle medical cure? Am I being lied to?

 

To help at least one person not get brain damage after being lied to about the dangers of marijuana by addicts.

 

You don't understand what cherry picking means - please go look it up. I am not claiming the list is anything but what it is - scientific studies showing the dangers of marijuana. It can only be "cherry picking" if I intentionally excluded one such study. Don't be so upset that people will be able to read the science that addicts want to keep hidden.

- - - Updated - - -

Cannabis more damaging to health than previously thought claim doctors (Imperial College London)

Your argument is still a strawman as someone can have brain damage and be very much alive.

- - - Updated - - -

None of those cause brain damage.

 

Straw man, you are misrepresenting the fact that some states are passing marijuana for personal consumption.

Also, the states that have passed marijuana for medical purposes do not need FDA approval.

- - - Updated - - -

Cherry picking. You are ignoring the side effects of atypical antipsychotics, which have been approved by the FDA.

- - - Updated - - -

Straw man, you are misrepresenting the fact that you are helping people. No one has responded positively to this thread, so they will continue to smoke marijuana.

 

Strawman I made no such argument.

They do if they make new drugs out of it. Should the FDA be allowed to prevent the release of new drugs?

You don't understand what cherry picking means either. Strawman, I am not ignoring any such thing nor claimed there were no side effects.

LMAO, you don't understand what a strawman argument is. That was my reason for commenting here, it is impossible for it to be a strawman argument or any argument at all. It is typical for addicts to be the main ones to respond to marijuana threads.

Don't you care if people get brain damage?

 

Straw man, you are misrepresenting that you wanted marijuana users to be killed.

Sure. Ban .0000001% of the medical marijuana supply. Complete waste of my time to worry about.

Straw man, you are misrepresenting that you understand what cherry picking is. Cherry picking, you did not bring up the damage of atypical antipsychotics at all in this thread.
You don't care about people who get brain damage.

Straw man, you are assuming that people responding in this thread smoke marijuana. I do not.

Don't you care if people get brain damage from Abilify, or alcohol?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ttj9YTZSp5g

Christopher Hitchens on marijuana.

 

The article is a poor one. It does not give any evidence of dangers of Cannabis. It just assumes that it is as dangerous as smoking then works out how many people would be killed. As for being a strawman, no, if the health impacts are only minor or only impact on a small minority of people then it is pointless to make it illegal. Probably pointless anyway.


Edit.

From your link

Making it illegal does not appear to be much of a deterrent. As I said it is pointless making it illegal.

 

Good question.

The argument is one of self-ownership and individual liberty.

 

How are you defining "moderation" in this context? Can you quantify it?

Did this study attempt to control for any variables besides the use other drugs? Do they count alcohol as "other drugs"? Prescription drugs? Why do you automatically assume their poor performance on the exams was due to "brain damage" (I don't recall the study mentioning brain damage, only impairment and deterioration in "cognitive abilities") and not something like lack of interest, depression, or cultural biases?

 

Do you want to answer his question?

 

you have a point, the message to take from this is that eating Marijuana is obviously better for you then smoking it

now lets talk about how the war on drugs harms society...
.

 

With the brain damage issue, one of the studies says it is only relevant for people who start before they are 18. This is a good reason to legalize it so that it can be kept away from these people just like tobacco is now.

http://today.duke.edu/2012/08/potiq

A problem with many of these studies is that they are not double blind with controls studies.

 

"Ten Years After Decriminalization, Drug Abuse Down by Half in Portugal"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...lization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/

remember, the abuse is there legal or not, just one makes criminals of those that did not abuse